Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!van-bc!sl
From: sl@van-bc.UUCP (pri=-10 Stuart Lynne)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
Subject: Re: post office protocol
Message-ID: <2049@van-bc.UUCP>
Date: 22 Dec 88 06:50:34 GMT
References: <4889@mailgw.cc.umich.edu> <578@redsox.UUCP>
Reply-To: sl@van-bc.UUCP (pri=-10 Stuart Lynne)
Organization: Wimsey Associates, Vancouver, BC.
Lines: 21

In article <578@redsox.UUCP> campbell@redsox.UUCP (Larry Campbell) writes:
>At the risk of starting a minor flame war (Go ahead, punk, make my day),
>I'm going to suggest that implementing POP would be a waste of time because
>the 1988 X.400 series of recommendation contains a protocol to implement
>a Message Store, which is exactly what POP provides.  (I don't remember
>that actual recommendation number of the Message Store document, since
>my references are all at the office.)
>
>Why fiddle with random hacks when recognized international standards exist?

POP would seem to be a much smaller effort to implement than X.400. 

POP will layer into a TCP/IP network quite nicely, X.400 is a little harder.

Personally I'm waiting for the 1992 X.400 to see which way the dust settles
before I start implementing, and POP would be fun to play with in the
meantime :-)


-- 
Stuart.Lynne@wimsey.bc.ca {ubc-cs,uunet}!van-bc!sl     Vancouver,BC,604-937-7532